Background/Context: Adding global competency to the Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Program of International Student Assessment (PISA) suite heralds the world’s first large-scale attempt at gauging education systems’ development of students’ global competency. Given the contested definitions and more than 150 extant instruments whose creators purport to measure global competency or related constructs, it is important to interrogate how influential and privileged global voices such as OECD portray and promote the construct. This new aspect of the PISA battery has the potential to reach 15 year olds in 80 countries that account for more than 80% of the world economy.

Purpose/Focus of Study: This paper is the first of a series of policy studies aimed at mapping OECD’s global competency measure that will occur at significant periods of time within the implementation process. This initial study examines OECD’s Global Competency for an Inclusive World (GCIW) promotional document to reveal its construction of global competency within discourse and assessment design.

Research Design: The study employs an uncommon mix of interpretive and relational methods. Critical discourse analysis (CDA) captures “how” global competency is portrayed and interrogates implications of OECD’s language use and power differentials. Social network analysis (SNA) captures “who” is influencing the policy text and examines the connectivity among the authors cited as authorities on the subject of global competency. Greene, Caracelli, and Graham’s (1989) convergence, complementarity, and contradiction framework is used to triangulate qualitative and quantitative datasets. Discussion and recommendations are framed and filtered through a policy implementation lens with five core policy threads: (a) people, (b) place, (c) philosophies, (d) processes, and (e) power, which Authors (2015a) refer to as the 5Ps.

Findings: CDA and SNA findings converge around the people, power, and places most central to OECD’s approach to measuring global competency. The CDA shows that OECD’s construction of the globally competent student reflects a rather narrow philosophical view of the term. The SNA demonstrates the power of particular academic networks and people that have informed this particular construction of global competency. CDA and SNA tell complementary stories about OECD’s philosophies and processes. There were minimal contradictions between analytical methods, but the document under review seemed at odds with its own claims at times. For example, the PISA global competency measure seems to privilege particular social and economic ideologies, exercising power through its language in ways that oppose the very global competency definition that OECD seems to espouse.

Conclusions: By investigating the policy threads (5Ps) embedded in GCIW’s production, the authors of the current study find OECD to have entertained a somewhat limited conversation in developing its definitional and measurement frameworks for assessing global competency. The ensuing critique highlights power differentials and inequalities within the GCIW document, revealing political, social, and technical issues. The current study concludes by challenging policymakers to seek a wider range of voices to inform policy directions as OECD and other influential organizations continue to refine their understanding of global competency, a 21st century imperative that is yet-to-be fully understood. The current study also offers recommendations such as continuing critiques of global policy texts and measures from inception through implementation, ensuring to capture both implications and impacts.

To view the full-text for this article you must be signed-in with the appropriate membership. Please review your options below:

Sign-in

Email:

Password:

Store a cookie on my computer that will allow me to skip this sign-in in the future.

Purchase OECD’s Approach to Measuring Global Competency: Powerful Voices Shaping EducationIndividual-Resource passes allow you to purchase access to resources one resource at a time. There are no recurring fees.

$12

Become a Member

Online AccessWith this membership you receive online access to all of TCRecord's content. The introductory rate of $25 is available for a limited time.

$25

Print and Online AccessWith this membership you receive the print journal and free online access to all of TCRecord's content.

Susan LedgerMurdoch UniversityE-mail AuthorSUSAN LEDGER is Associate Dean of Engagement at Murdoch University, Australia. Her research interest centers on mixed method approaches to policy, practices, and issues related to the preparation of teachers for diverse contexts: international, rural, and remote. She is currently utilizing mixed reality learning environments and avatars to prepare preservice, inservice teachers and leaders for diverse and difficult contexts, scenarios, and critical incidences. Related publications:
Ledger, S. (2017). The International Baccalaureate Standards and Practices as reflected in literature (2009–2016). International Schools Journal, 37(1), 32–44. Petersfield: UK.
Ledger, S., Vidovich, L., & O’Donoghue, T. (2016). Global to local curriculum policy processes: The enactment of the International Baccalaureate in remote schools. Policy Implications of Research in Education Series, Vol.4. VIII, 217p. Springer.

Michael ThierUniversity of OregonE-mail AuthorMICHAEL THIER is a research associate jointly appointed to the University of Oregon's (UO) Center for Equity Promotion and Inflexion (formerly the Educational Policy Improvement Center). With collaborators in 10 countries, he pursues three goals: (a) helping education leaders implement and measure global citizenship education (GCE) programs; (b) comparing GCE programs’ possibilities and constraints internationally/cross-culturally; and (c) discovering opportunities and conditions that enable students, especially attendees of rural
and/or remote schools, to avail themselves of GCE programs. His recent publications on issues related to global citizenship can be found in journals such as Learning and Individual Differences, Psychological Assessment, and the Berkeley Review of Education.

Lucy BaileyUniversity of NottinghamE-mail AuthorLUCY BAILEY is Associate Professor in the School of Education at the University of Nottingham Malaysia Campus. Her research interests include refugee education, gender in education, and international schooling. She has recently published a chapter on international schools in the Routledge International Handbook of Schools and Schooling in Asia.
Bailey, L. (2015). Reskilled and 'running ahead': Teachers in an international school talk about their work. Journal of Research in International Education, 14(1), 3–15
Bailey, L., & Ingimundardottir, G. (2015). International employability: Stakeholder attitudes at an international university in Malaysia. Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability, 6(1), 44–55

Christine PittsUniversity of OregonE-mail AuthorCHRISTINE PITTS is a research scientist at NWEA in Portland, Oregon. Mrs. Pitts leads mixed methods education research studies on the efficacy and effectiveness of educational assessment and professional development programs, specifically regarding their relationship to instructional practices, teacher pedagogy, and student engagement in learning. Mrs. Pitts is a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Oregon in Educational Methodology, Policy, and Leadership. In her practice as an educator, researcher, and policy analyst, Christine prioritizes the transformation of existing education policy and practices towards a model of teaching and learning that engages communities in developing a sustainable shift for equitable systems.